Donald Trump 2019

[HenryJames 66,052]

 

 

[TexEx15 17,528]

11 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

 

Well that’s just par for the course.

[WhatTheBuck 28,781]

17 minutes ago, retread said:

What do we want to call the healthcare thread? I don't think we have one. I'll start it.

How about this? "Why the rest of us paying for the poors to get all their health care at the Emergency Room is a really stupid fucking idea."

[elfenix 34,240]

2 hours ago, SimonBolivar said:

Pardon my lack of political science knowledge, but what exactly is the process for the administration to push for a court ordered end to the ACA? I'm guessing they contact a friendly judge and have them take up the case in the hopes that it eventually rises to the SCOTUS?

normally the justice department is supposed to defend the laws passed by congress and the implementation of them as being within the constitution.  trump isn't doing that, and the justice department is actually briefing against it. 

[HenryJames 66,052]

 

[Gap03 3,307]

11 minutes ago, TexEx15 said:

Well that’s just par for the course.

Dude, paying all of your taxes is for chumps.  Do you really want a chump on the Fed?

[JimmyJames 12,271]

1 hour ago, tjhooker said:

FYI I gotta jet for a few hours so in case someone wants to say I am taking my ball and leaving.  Son's baseball game.

Shift change! Who’s coming up next? Chrispy troll? Chicken Sandwich? No not swam. Bad mofo?

[JimmyJames 12,271]

3 hours ago, tjhooker said:

I know what it means.  I was asking when he said take my ball and go home what he was talking about.  What instance did I threaten to do something like that?  BTW I still have no answer to that question.  You are buying into the Jimmy and Smokey trolling.  Congrats!

Nice try tj. You clearly did not know what that expression means, one that every single person in the country knows. I’ll let it slide I suppose, only bringing it up, ya know, every now and then. You keep doing what you do. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

3 hours ago, tjhooker said:

It's already happening.  You notice a difference?  

Declining life expectancy for the last three years?  Yeah, we noticed.

[4th&Five 41,552]

37 minutes ago, HenryJames said:

 

No substance but makes for a good show. That pretty much sums up his life. 

[Fudge Nuggets 19,190]

2 minutes ago, 4th&Five said:

No substance but makes for a good show. That pretty much sums up his life. 

This country will not be ruled by Executive Orders.

Your Friends,
Every Republican from Jan 20 2009 - Jan 20 2017

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 minutes ago, Fudge Nuggets said:

Declining life expectancy for the last three years?  Yeah, we noticed.

The fact that overal life expetancy is declining in this country is both ridiculous, immoral, an indictment, and the best sign ever that this country is becoming totally fucked. The richest country in the history of the world now has a declining overall life expectancy, and we are talking about millions of people to somehow lower that average. You trump supporting dipshits are being suckered and you are going to eventually die early because of, mah guns, abortions and blah blah blah. 

Fuck all you trolls supporting trump and the republicans. They really really don’t care if you die. They want it in fact, and you are enabling it. So you can have your precious gun that they will take away from you when they feel like it and it no longer matters what you think. 

Idoits. 

[elguapo 4,586]

3 minutes ago, JimmyJames said:

The fact that overal life expetancy is declining in this country is both ridiculous, immoral, an indictment, and the best sign ever that this country is becoming totally fucked. The richest country in the history of the world now has a declining overall life expectancy, and we are talking about millions of people to somehow lower that average. You trump supporting dipshits are being suckered and you are going to eventually die early because of, mah guns, abortions and blah blah blah. 

Fuck all you trolls supporting trump and the republicans. They really really don’t care if you die. They want it in fact, and you are enabling it. So you can have your precious gun that they will take away from you when they feel like it and it no longer matters what you think. 

Idoits. 

“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” - Cheeto President

 

[JimmyJames 12,271]

2 minutes ago, elguapo said:

“Take the guns first, go through due process second,” - Cheeto President

 

Trumpkins- “he was just kidding. Right?”

[JimmyJames 12,271]

Or trump told me that was fake news and video that CNN doctored. 

MAGAGAGAGA!

[Paul Wesley 3,278]

5 hours ago, David Dennison said:

 

 

Obviously she wants to make a point.  I mean, more than she wants either a moment of reverence or actual communication with a higher power, she wants every Islamic, Jewish, Hindu, etc, legislator to know who’s running the fucking show.  

In other words, it seems to me to be right in line with everything else today’s fake evangelicals (i e Trumpkins) do that’s antithetical to the behaviors that Jesus modeled in the New Testament.  

[retread 2,951]

^ cross post from immigration thread. This is what America is now.

 

Edited March 27, 2019 by retread

[bolverk 29,672]

First, apologies for bringing back up the individual mandate but I just got home and would like to address the auto/health insurance analogy, which I think is really quite apt.

Auto: When you drive your car on public streets, you and your vehicle are interacting with other humans and vehicles. It is reasonable to assume you might have an accident and therefore injure another person or damage another vehicle. Because of these risks, the government has an interest in making sure that you can cover those damages through your insurance. That seems reasonable.

Health: When you are in the public sphere, you and your body are interacting with other humans and their bodies. It is reasonable to assume you and others are at risk in spreading and/or contracting diseases; causing and/or suffering injury; missing work due to illness/injury which adversely affects your boss/employees/coworkers/customers. Moreover, healthcare providers are required to provide you care as opposed to autobody shops. Because of these risks, the government has an interest in making sure that your care can be paid for. That seems reasonable.

Another interesting case is Home Owners insurance, which is required if you are holding a mortgage.

So, it seems the common thread in these three instances is for the government to "promote the general welfare" as stated in the preamble to the US Constitution by requiring us to take personal responsibility through a means (i.e., insurance) of covering liability.

[Anastasis 23,469]

1 minute ago, bolverk said:

First, apologies for bringing back up the individual mandate but I just got home and would like to address the auto/health insurance analogy, which I think is really quite apt.

The problem with the individual mandate under ACA is that it was not actuarially sound.  It need to be MUCH higher.  This was a fatal flaw. 

[bolverk 29,672]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

The problem with the individual mandate under ACA is that it was not actuarially sound.  It need to be MUCH higher.  This was a fatal flaw. 

I'm not a healthcare or policy analyst but was only trying to explain the principle or rationale for ensuring that all are covered. I believe, however, that the ACA tried to tinker with that flaw by providing subsidies and/or tax breaks to try to make up that difference. It is a Frankenstein-like system meant to retain/protect a market-based approach to universal healthcare coverage and is therefore really inefficient.

Of course, you already know my opinion on that which is I would prefer a different, government-backed approach for taking out the middleman entirely and just pay for it through taxes.

[TexEx15 17,528]

7 minutes ago, bolverk said:

First, apologies for bringing back up the individual mandate but I just got home and would like to address the auto/health insurance analogy, which I think is really quite apt.

Auto: When you drive your car on public streets, you and your vehicle are interacting with other humans and vehicles. It is reasonable to assume you might have an accident and therefore injure another person or damage another vehicle. Because of these risks, the government has an interest in making sure that you can cover those damages through your insurance. That seems reasonable.

Health: When you are in the public sphere, you and your body are interacting with other humans and their bodies. It is reasonable to assume you and others are at risk in spreading and/or contracting diseases; causing and/or suffering injury; missing work due to illness/injury which adversely affects your boss/employees/coworkers/customers. Moreover, healthcare providers are required to provide you care as opposed to autobody shops. Because of these risks, the government has an interest in making sure that your care can be paid for. That seems reasonable.

Another interesting case is Home Owners insurance, which is required if you are holding a mortgage.

So, it seems the common thread in these three instances is for the government to "promote the general welfare" as stated in the preamble to the US Constitution by requiring us to take personal responsibility through a means (i.e., insurance) of covering liability.

Nice job adding some more detail.  The other element is a little more nebulous.  The individual mandate also protects other people in that it makes it affordable (relatively speaking) to obtain.  If only sick people bought insurance - adverse selection - most people couldn’t afford it.  The bottom line with health insurance is that healthy people’s premiums pay for sick people’s claims.  The idea is that while you are young and healthy you are paying for those who are sick and that when you get older and need it there will be more young health people to pay for you.

[Anastasis 23,469]

6 minutes ago, bolverk said:

I'm not a healthcare or policy analyst but was only trying to explain the principle or rationale for ensuring that all are covered. I believe, however, that the ACA tried to tinker with that flaw by providing subsidies and/or tax breaks to try to make up that difference. It is a Frankenstein-like system meant to retain/protect a market-based approach to universal healthcare coverage and is therefore really inefficient.

Of course, you already know my opinion on that which is I would prefer a different, government-backed approach for taking out the middleman entirely and just pay for it through taxes.

This was the intended effect of ACA.  It was an fucked up program designed to fail so that a single payer system would be positioned as the most viable fix. 

[bolverk 29,672]

1 minute ago, Anastasis said:

This was the intended effect of ACA.  It was an fucked up program designed to fail so that a single payer system would be positioned as the most viable fix. 

I don't think it was designed to fail unless you believe Mitt Romney and the Heritage Foundation intended for us to eventually have a single-payer system. If so, good on them.

[troph 24,798]

This was the intended effect of ACA.  It was an fucked up program designed to fail so that a single payer system would be positioned as the most viable fix. 

Which based on the rest of the western world it is the most viable fix.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

14 minutes ago, Anastasis said:

This was the intended effect of ACA.  It was an fucked up program designed to fail so that a single payer system would be positioned as the most viable fix. 

It's gonna end up that way, but it wasn't designed that way. It could have easily been shored up, but those with the power to do so were/are more interested in knocking down the dam rather than plugging the leak. It's a huge mistake on Trump and the GOPs part if they truly never want universal care because when the Dems have power again, there will be nothing worth fixing in the ACA.

And when Dems finally understand that only the left cares about healthcare for all, they'll push single payer through with or without the GOP when the time comes. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

The thing you want to do when you’ve just been acquitted of treason is cripple Puerto Rico, throw millions off healthcare, and kill the special olympics.

That’s how you show them you really care about America.

[scottsins 1,966]

No, because it should cause the ACA to implode due that requirement not being in it.  Furthermore, I dont like people being required to buy something as simply due to them being alive in the US and an adult.

Like auto liability insurance?

[David Dennison 18,860]

Just now, scottsins said:

Like auto liability insurance?

 

No one is forcing you drive, bro.

That's the brilliant retort from the right.

[bolverk 29,672]

Someone's about a page behind, I see.

[FondrenRoad 4,378]

1 minute ago, David Dennison said:

No one is forcing you drive, bro.

That's the brilliant retort from the right.

Actually, the right did force people to drive. They completely destroyed public transportation in most places in America. 

[David Dennison 18,860]

Just now, tjhooker said:

it is not even the same at all on many levels.

It doesn't matter.

We're going to get to a single payer system anyway. There's no going back.

[scottsins 1,966]

Once again, a horrible analogy.  You dont have to buy auto insurance.  You dont have to own a car.  Many people in this country dont.  Just a really bad analogy people think is a good one when it is not.  You can go through life and never be forced to pay for auto insurance.

 

Ok. I’m pretty sure that it’s been brought up, but why about people like me that don’t have kids, yet pay school taxes?

 

It seems like you have no issue with the government forcing expenditures by citizens, as a principle. Your objection is strictly a matter of scope and size, I guess?

 

* ETA: The “you can choose not to drive” comment is interesting. See, if I choose to not own a vehicle, then I don’t have to pay, because by not owning/operating a vehicle, I pose no risk to others which is why it’s ok.

 

There is no way to opt out of getting sick/injured, which does pose a financial risk to others.

[David Dennison 18,860]

Just now, tjhooker said:

LOL OK.  My grandma went through her entire life and never drove.  dont know how she did it but she did.  point is you arent born with the requirement in the US to buy auto insurance once your reach adulthood like you are health insurance now.  This is bestowed upon you now at birth.  

You are not required to buy health insurance.

[scottsins 1,966]

Someone's about a page behind, I see.

More than that.

[bolverk 29,672]

13 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

Once again, a horrible analogy.  You dont have to buy auto insurance.  You dont have to own a car.  Many people in this country dont.  Just a really bad analogy people think is a good one when it is not.  You can go through life and never be forced to pay for auto insurance.

You're either being willfully obtuse or not reading the full thread.

[bad_teammate 13,195]

Lookin' good, Steve-o

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Bannon looks like he just picked the wrong cup in the Indiana Jones movie. 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

Edited March 28, 2019 by Hugo Stiglitz

[Hugo Stiglitz 23,367]

 

[jimmyjazz 45,952]

2 hours ago, tjhooker said:

Once again, a horrible analogy.  You dont have to buy auto insurance.  You dont have to own a car.  Many people in this country dont.  Just a really bad analogy people think is a good one when it is not.  You can go through life and never be forced to pay for auto insurance.

We (me first) destroyed your stupid point, and yet you keep bringing it up, Komrade.  Funny how that happens.  

I thought you took ball and gone home?

Edited March 28, 2019 by jimmyjazz

[Satchel 6,938]

2 hours ago, Anastasis said:

This was the intended effect of ACA.  It was an fucked up program designed to fail so that a single payer system would be positioned as the most viable fix. 

Had not Republicans systematically sabotaged the state exchanges, the ACA would have been much more successful that it has been.

[jimmyjazz 45,952]

4 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

You don't even try to disguise your trolling anymore.  Just said fuck it I am owning it. 

I'm not trolling, I laid out the exact parallel between health and auto insurance, and scottsins later said exactly the same thing.  You refuse to acknowledge either.  It's blindingly obvious you are uninterested in real debate, presumably because you routinely get your ass kicked and are at least smart enough to avoid dangerous neighborhoods.

Hint:  an analogy need not be perfect to be illustrative.

 

Quote

Also, saw you MAGA meltdown earlier. You OK? 

I have no idea what you are talking about.  Are you confusing me with somebody else?

[JimmyJames 12,271]

1 minute ago, tjhooker said:

You don't even try to disguise your trolling anymore.  Just said fuck it I am owning it. 

Also, saw you MAGA meltdown earlier. You OK? 

Are you now owning the fact that you’ve never heard the phrase take your ball and go home too?

Learn the language before you talk dipshit.

 You just cost yourself the bonus. I gots to get the bonus doc.

[JimmyJames 12,271]

11 minutes ago, tjhooker said:

You don't even try to disguise your trolling anymore.  Just said fuck it I am owning it. 

Also, saw you MAGA meltdown earlier. You OK? 

Projection 

[Anastasis 23,469]

17 minutes ago, Satchel said:

Had not Republicans systematically sabotaged the state exchanges, the ACA would have been much more successful that it has been.

Disagree. The fatal flaw was the lack of teeth in the mandate.  The GOP sabotaged the RRR pathways, but the mandate was crucial to making the entire system work. Adverse selection won the day. 

[jimmyjazz 45,952]

That "lack of teeth" cost me over a kilobuck with Uncle Sam because I bought a bridge policy that didn't conform.

[Anastasis 23,469]

10 minutes ago, jimmyjazz said:

That "lack of teeth" cost me over a kilobuck with Uncle Sam because I bought a bridge policy that didn't conform.

Which is only evidence that the penalty was not enough.

 

I don't know what the right mandate would have been. Some data suggests that 80% of premium price might be a sweet spot. 

[jimmyjazz 45,952]

I was on the bridge policy for 3 months.

[911isajoke 6]

I fucking LOVE Obamacare .

It has saved my life. 

If it is repealed i should kill the guy who does that in self defense. 

If he can kill a guy on 5th Avenue, I can kill a guy trying to kill a guy on my avenue.

Stand my ground right!

Because I feel threatened.

Mar-alago is in Florida.

Edited March 28, 2019 by 911isajoke